Re: Wolves (h)

Might be half time before I get there tonight. Or I could just turn back if we're 4-0 down.

Call me up in dreamland. Radio to me man.

Share

Re: Wolves (h)

I can’t bring myself to go.

Share

Re: Wolves (h)

Loose Lips wrote:

I can’t bring myself to go.

Same here. Turned a ticket down last night

Share

Re: Wolves (h)

Bailey Peacock-Farrell starts, I'm changing my prediction to a 0-3 away win.

"Being Irish, he had an abiding sense of tragedy, which sustained him through temporary periods of joy."

Re: Wolves (h)

And Sacko. Am I allowed another amendment? 0-4.

"Being Irish, he had an abiding sense of tragedy, which sustained him through temporary periods of joy."

Re: Wolves (h)

Mol wrote:

And Sacko. Am I allowed another amendment? 0-4.

It's okay Sacko is in goal!

I'd like to see him given an extended run just so I can be sure!

Last edited by Mega Armageddon Chickens (Wed 07 Mar 2018 8:23 pm)

Share

Re: Wolves (h)

If you can be bothered:


http://crickfree.net/soccer/leeds-wolve … 2462604678

http://www.last.fm/listen/artist/Art%2BAttacks/similarartists
http://www.stewarthomesociety.org/interviews/artattax.htm

¡No pasaran!

Share

Re: Wolves (h)

Got in after 38 mins. Glad I bothered.

Call me up in dreamland. Radio to me man.

Share

Re: Wolves (h)

This could end up anything.
We just haven't a scooby doo how to defend set pieces !
In fact,how to defend at all!

Managerial endeavour = houses = money.

Share

Re: Wolves (h)

If it wasn't for the keeper it could have been a very embarrassing first half.  Good job the clown wasn't in net!

Share

Re: Wolves (h)

Good goal. We're shite.

http://www.last.fm/listen/artist/Art%2BAttacks/similarartists
http://www.stewarthomesociety.org/interviews/artattax.htm

¡No pasaran!

Share

Re: Wolves (h)

If it wasn't for the start of the season we'd be in as relegation battle.  Toothless up front, porous at the back. The decline has been quite staggering.

Share

Re: Wolves (h)

Heckingbotttom has that haunted, thousand mile stare of a the last man in the trench.


Is 49 points enough to avoid the drop? Lad I work with reminded me that Blackburn went down with 52 points.

http://www.last.fm/listen/artist/Art%2BAttacks/similarartists
http://www.stewarthomesociety.org/interviews/artattax.htm

¡No pasaran!

Share

Re: Wolves (h)

90Piesanhour wrote:

Heckingbotttom has that haunted, thousand mile stare of a the last man in the trench.


Is 49 points enough to avoid the drop? Lad I work with reminded me that Blackburn went down with 52 points.

It's the reality of the situation he now finds himself in.  The expectation of the fans, saddled with the shit he has to work with.  He's probably now knows he's the next fall guy for the top brass.

Share

Re: Wolves (h)

0-3. Good showing. We're on the up

Share

Re: Wolves (h)

It's not Radz's fault, so he says!

https://twitter.com/andrearadri/status/ … 3801793537

Share

Re: Wolves (h)

90Piesanhour wrote:

Heckingbotttom has that haunted, thousand mile stare of a the last man in the trench.


Is 49 points enough to avoid the drop? Lad I work with reminded me that Blackburn went down with 52 points.

The tightest season I remember when we were in this league was 2012/13, quite a few teams could go down on the last day.
Peterborough went down with 54. You won`t need that many this season.

________________________________________________________________________________

Share

Re: Wolves (h)

Chopper Read wrote:

It's not Radz's fault, so he says!

https://twitter.com/andrearadri/status/ … 3801793537

Embarrassing.

________________________________________________________________________________

Share

Re: Wolves (h)

Peacock-Farrel looks about 12 years old, but way better than the flapper...


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fVZZh0GGDq4

Fascista, Communista, Tory Boy or Labourista, come and view the whole damn vista, om pom push

Share

Re: Wolves (h)

albert herbert hawkins wrote:

Peacock-Farrel looks about 12 years old, but way better than the flapper...


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fVZZh0GGDq4

He didn't look too bad from those clips, but I didn't see the game. Woke up, we were 0-2 down, went back to sleep.

Apart from Villa and PNE away in April, we don't appear to have to toughest of matches to see the season out. Reading on Saturday, could be tricky, but apart from that, nothing too scary.

'When you become a grown up, people stop asking you what your favourite dinosaur is....They don't even care.'

Share

Re: Wolves (h)

Chopper Read wrote:
90Piesanhour wrote:

Heckingbotttom has that haunted, thousand mile stare of a the last man in the trench.


Is 49 points enough to avoid the drop? Lad I work with reminded me that Blackburn went down with 52 points.

It's the reality of the situation he now finds himself in.  The expectation of the fans, saddled with the shit he has to work with.  He's probably now knows he's the next fall guy for the top brass.

You mean the same pile of shit Christiansen had to work with?

Managerial endeavour = houses = money.

Share

Re: Wolves (h)

Mitaman wrote:
albert herbert hawkins wrote:

Peacock-Farrel looks about 12 years old, but way better than the flapper...


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fVZZh0GGDq4

He didn't look too bad from those clips, but I didn't see the game. Woke up, we were 0-2 down, went back to sleep.

Apart from Villa and PNE away in April, we don't appear to have to toughest of matches to see the season out. Reading on Saturday, could be tricky, but apart from that, nothing too scary.

Fulham away, a doddle.

Call me up in dreamland. Radio to me man.

Share

Re: Wolves (h)

I watched it last night, a fair bit of the first half and a bit of the second half. The Leeds midfield was porous and very reactive, it went Wolves pass, Leeds player moves to the ball, Wolves pass, Leeds player etc etc.

Share

Re: Wolves (h)

Good energy in first 20 minutes. Huffed and puffed and created the rhythm of the game.

Wolves rode out this early hubris with careful defending and tore us apart with incisive one touch passing and movement. Almost looked like they could score at will. They made 3 or 4 chances in first half hour.

The Keeper made a decent save half way through first half. Good for Confidence. He didn't look like as dodgy as WW but at the same time he didn't overly impress for me.

Sacko was shown up for what he is and what is wrong with modern football, an athlete who is strong and fast, well coached so understand the basics of modern football but sadly offers nothing above that, no guile, football brain, intelligence or creativity.

We didn't look particularly bad, we just didn't look very good and they looked like a team who were well organised, difficult to break down, could handle pressure and tear us apart at will with counter attacks.

Radzianni lost his shit on twitter, accusing Wolves of bending the rules and having better players. Something to do with being owned by a sports agency. Whatever.

I'm not sure what happened to TC and the team but we seemed to implode after showing early signs of creating a great attacking team. Safe to say the Money Ball system from Orta hasnt worked this season.

Share

Re: Wolves (h)

We aren't very good are we? That's becoming more and more apparent.  But I thought they tried last night, actually looked like they cared as opposed to Friday's showing.

Share